Section 71 Exhaustion

• Library: Urban Development Subdivisions, and Annexations (2011 Ed.)

A party aggrieved by an administrative zoning decision must exhaust its administrative remedies before it can resort to an action at law or in equity. A party is not entitled to a writ of mandamus or declaratory judgment when there is an available adequate remedy—by way of administrative review—that has not been exhausted. See:

· State ex rel. J.S. Alberici, Inc. v. City of Fenton, 576 S.W.2d 574 (Mo. App. E.D. 1979)

· § 64.660, RSMo 2000, and § 536.100, RSMo Supp. 2010

· Williams v. City of Kirkwood, 537 S.W.2d 571 (Mo. App. E.D. 1976)

· Cohen v. Ennis, 318 S.W.2d 310 (Mo. banc 1958)

Courts will routinely dismiss cases when exclusive remedies are not exhausted first. See State ex rel. Freeway Media, L.L.C. v. City of Kansas City, 14 S.W.3d 169, 173 (Mo. App. W.D. 2000) (a declaratory judgment and writ of mandamus action for denial of outdoor advertising permits was improper, and the exclusive remedy was an appeal to the board of zoning appeals; the declaratory judgment law is not a substitute for already existing remedies); Fewin v. City of Poplar Bluff, 768 S.W.2d 594, 595 (Mo. App. S.D. 1989) (appeal dismissed because no showing that rental property owner had exhausted administrative remedies under the city's ordinances establishing the procedure for obtaining building permits and appeals from a denial of them).

The proper course of...